Re: Re: Should we have an optional limit on the recursion depth of recursive CTEs? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Re: Should we have an optional limit on the recursion depth of recursive CTEs?
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoadvSFzKSLzpiFOq8EOmTot_NAZXn26sFcdxLhw4E+aQw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re: Should we have an optional limit on the recursion depth of recursive CTEs?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> In fact, we already have some things sort of like this: you can use
>> statement_timeout to kill queries that run for too long, and we just
>> recently added temp_file_limit to kill those that eat too much temp
>> file space.   I can see a good case for memory_limit and
>> query_cpu_limit and maybe some others.
>
> temp_file_limit got accepted because it was constraining a resource not
> closely related to run time.  I don't think that it provides a precedent
> in support of any of these other ideas.

Well, CPU usage might be somewhat closely related to query runtime,
but memory usage sure isn't.

But we digress from $SUBJECT...

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Updated version of pg_receivexlog
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: synchronized snapshots